Blog #11

Blog Questions:

1.       What religion were you raised with and how does that affect your view of spiritual ecology?

2.       What are your opinions on the Gaia Hypothesis? Do you agree or disagree?

3.       Do you believe we live in a hyper-masculine culture? If so, how do you see it changing?

I am Catholic. I was raised as a Catholic with an understanding of and an appreciation for Islam, since that is my father’s faith. I think that my spiritual background, if one can call it that, has affected my perspective on life as well as my view of spiritual ecology.  My belief, stated as it relates to spiritual ecology, is that we are all connected through our similarities and human dignity, and there is a higher power, God, who has created the universe, giving us humans a responsibility to protect and nurture the natural environment. This relates to spiritual ecology because I think both ideologies emphasize the importance of viewing problems holistically, with the natural world an inextricable component, and that achieving peace can only happen when the natural environment is respected. This is a main point of Pope Benedict’s message for the World Day of Peace 2010. In fact, my faith lead me to pursue an academic path and career that is linked to the environment.

I feel that the Gaia Hypothesis is very interesting, and I had never considered that life is what influences the atmosphere. I am inclined to agree with the interesting, beautiful notion that the entire earth is alive. Also, in reading the article on the Gaia hypothesis, I felt that the main argument was that all of these conditions that make life optimal are so unlikely that there must be some powerful force at play. I believe that this is God’s work. I also feel that the hypothesis makes it a more beautiful concept to care for and to be an interconnected part of the earth, which is in contrast to the view that we are at the mercy of some hostile, savage environment.

 However, since this is called a hypothesis, it is implied that this can be tested through experimentation and potentially become a theory. Is this possible?

From my understanding from the readings, I would say that we live in a hyper-masculine culture. But perhaps I am susceptible to the persuasive arguments of the author. I think that this culture is already changing because of the shifting of perceived roles of men and women.

Also, I took the quiz on “What Spirit Animal Are You?” and I got a Bear, but when I read the description, I did not really think that it described me. And when I asked my sister to take it she got a Crow, and ironically, the website says that Crows and Bears should “watch out for” the other. 

Blog #10

What is Social Ecology? What are your reactions to the readings? What forms of hierarchy are in our world today? Are these hierarchies natural? Are there any better alternatives?

Social ecology emphasizes an egalitarian and democratic philosophy for society that is without hierarchies or submission to “the market.” My reaction to the reading is that I like the idea of social ecology, and I feel that society would benefit from adopting the basic philosophy presented in the articles. I like that the Bookchin article acknowledges that social ecology exists as a context for modern developments and technology, so that these things do not preclude adoption of social ecological ideals.
Some forms of hierarchy that I see in our world today are manifested in issues as serious as the gender pay gap and as mundane as the student body elections taking place this week... However, an important hierarchy that is highlighted in the readings is the difference between American society and third-world countries. Particularly noted is how our resource consumption is not only unsustainable but excludes the participation of others in our way of life.
I feel like these hierarchies may not be natural, but that they originate from a part of our human nature. My beliefs are in line with the green value that people are innately good and cooperative, but I also think that there is something innate that makes us susceptible to temptation and driven to compete. Human nature can be contradictory and paradoxical. Perhaps hierarchies come about because of people acting on this motivation for competition, which we see in the natural world. 
I believe that there are better alternatives. The Milbrath article presents a great alternative in the New Environment Paradigm. One example presented in the Trainer reading would be for affluent countries to commit to “de-development,” but I am not sure how I feel about that term. I agree that affluent countries must make resource use sustainable, which will involve sacrificing common, “convenient” practices, but wouldn’t this process be helping society reach a higher state of ethical development?

Blog #9

Explain your view on deep ecology.
How can you relate these views to your lifestyle or society? Which principle do you agree most with and which do you agree least with? Why? What concerns do you have about Deep
Ecology? 

My view on deep ecology is that we, as humans, are fundamentally connected to and members of the natural world. However, I do realize that my lifestyle probably reflects more of a shallow ecology view, since I say things like “protect the environment” as if it were a separate entity from me. Also, I feel like I have this altruistic, separating attitude towards most environmental issues. Even the fact that I just called them environmental issues signifies this. I agree with a lot of the principles of deep ecology, but I would not say that I transform these beliefs into action very often. However, I am now realizing the importance of pairing learning with action, which we are doing in this class through our green action projects. So, I suppose that my involvement in the Food Systems Team, the Green Learning Community, and my studying Environmental Health are all ways that I am drawing closer to relating my views to my lifestyle. I agree most with the principle of diversity and symbiosis, because I feel that all people should work together and that each person is valuable and equal in dignity. However, the principle that I agree with least is the local autonomy and decentralization. I think that this principle is important, but that it is an ideal, and in our current society, we cannot effectively achieve this because of the social structure set in place. I am mainly concerned that deep ecology will be unable to go mainstream, because shallow ecology is so embedded in our language.

Blog #8

What are the preconditions necessary for using consensus decision making in a group or organization?  What are the strengths and weaknesses of the process?

The preconditions necessary for using consensus decision making relate to creating an environment of openness. Butler suggests that large groups and those without disruptions are good for this process. I understand that having a large group enter this process would be valuable, but I also feel that in this situation it is important that each member would feel empowered enough and comfortable to speak up. Of course the conditions that Butler lists are all important. From these listed principles, my interpretation is that each member must trust and respect one another, and feel a commitment to the purpose of the group so that they feel that they must share their own important ideas and skills by actively participating.

As for the process itself, there are many benefits to the members or users, but there are challenges as well. Some of the strengths of the process are that those involved in the process all have a say in the decision, as opposed to just one person. While one person or a smaller group might be able to make a decision more efficiently, it may not reflect the wishes of the group. The principles of this process ensure a strong community founded on respect and trust, but this will only work if all members are committed. The “block” process may be either a strength or weakness, since time is not wasted on an issue, but it may not be resolved, which is a problem. But it is not a large problem since it is rare, according to Caroline Estes.

Blog #7

What is culture-jamming?  What are its forms?  What do you think of it as a tool for activism?  Be sure to use specific examples for the readings and the Adbusters website.  For an extra point, find an example on youtube.

Culture-jamming is all about resisting and protesting the consumerist culture. It is not about one topic in particular, but this is what makes it so versatile. Adbuster’s version of culture-jamming is rooted in the philosophy that people should be able to think as individuals, and that they themselves have the right to free speech. One of the points in this article that found most interesting was the need for culture-jamming since consumerism and corporate logos and signage has become so rampant that we don’t even acknowledge it. And instead of this being a good thing, as if we pay no notice, it is instead a bad thing that we are desensitized to this emphasis on consumerism. Culture-jamming can come in amny forms, from “uncommercials” on television to billboards with these alternative messages. That is the defining factor of culture-jamming: the message must in some way be in opposition to the norm or raising awareness that some promoted norm is not as harmless as it seems. This certainly is the goal of Adbuster’s “Buy Nothing Day” ad, which personifies American consumer culture, especially during the holidays, as a huge pig, and describes the negative impacts of this consumption, which is much more than other countries. So certainly this type of culture-jamming can be used as activism, especially in promoting an idea that challenges one to think critically.

Here is one example of culture-jamming about the definition of beauty in the fashion industry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pfbqpXSUp8 

Blog #6

What are your reactions to your GTP reading?  What are your preliminary ideas for leading class meeting focused on this topic?

I think that the readings are interesting and provide a variety of views on the topic of environmental policy. This is my first college course experience with political science, so I found the introduction to several different theories and models of the policy-making process to be very interesting, and I could see some parallels to theories in other disciplines, such as psychology, especially with the rational choice theory. After reading about agenda setting, I feel like this step is the most likely place for green politics approach to take hold. In this step at the local level, the public can be more involved, which I feel is in line with green values.  

When our group talked in class, we considered the idea of having the class consider a case study of an issue or policy and applying ideas from the readings to it. But maybe we could separate the class into different groups representing different interest groups: industry, businesses, the policymakers, the general public, and other groups, and then walk through the policy process. This would include the agenda setting, policy formulation, policy legitimation, policy implementation, and finally policy and program evaluation. This may be too long of a process to go through in class, so we may need to abbreviate it or focus on one part.